alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Montauk-Star Island Realty Group, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Deep Sea Yacht & Racquet Club, Inc, et al., Respondents.

In an action, *inter alia,*for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property and to recover damages for breach of contract and fraud, plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Molloy, J.), dated April 29,1985, as, upon reargument of their motion for a preliminary injunction, adhered to the original determination denying the motion.

Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and upon reargument, so much of the order of the same court dated April 12, 1985, as denied plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction vacated and motion granted to the extent that the defendants are preliminarily enjoined (1) from commencing or prosecuting summary dispossess proceedings, including the proceeding entitled *“Deep Sea Yacht and Racquet Club, Inc., petitioner (landlord) v Montauk-East Hampton Development Corp., etc., respondent (tenant)”,*commenced in the Town of East Hampton Justice Court on April 30,1985, or any other action or proceeding to evict the plaintiffs from the property which is the subject of this action, and (2) from interfering in any way with the plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of the property until November 30, 1985, upon condition that the plaintiffs file in the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, an undertaking with corporate surety pursuant to CPLR 6312 (b) in the sum of $86,400, and serve a copy of the same upon the defendants. Plaintiffs’ time to file and serve said undertaking is extended until five days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry, and the preliminary injunction granted pursuant to CPLR 5518 by order of this court dated May 7, 1985, shall continue during such period. The parties are directed to proceed with the trial of this action forthwith.

*910It is well established that in order to be granted a preliminary injunction, a movant must demonstrate (1) a likelihood of ultimate success on the merits, (2) irreparable injury absent the granting of the preliminary injunction, and (3) that a balancing of equities favors his position *(see, Chrysler Realty Corp. v Urban Investing Corp.,*100 AD2d 921; *Gambar Enters, v Kelly Servs.,*69 AD2d 297, 306; *Tucker v Toia,*54 AD2d 322). Under the circumstances of this case, the applicable criteria have been satisfied. Therefore, Special Term abused its discretion in denying plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Thompson and Bracken, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 15.4





Schwartz
Levitsky Feldman llp
 CHARTERED
ACCOUNTANTS
 LICENSED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTANTS
 TORONTO
●MONTREAL











November 21,
2016








Securities and
Exchange Commission


Washington, D.C.
20549








Ladies
and Gentlemen:





We were
previously the independent registered public accounting firm for
LiveReel Media Corporation and under the date of February 18, 2016,
we reported on the consolidated financial statements of LiveReel
Media Corporation as of and for the years ended June 30, 2015 and
2014. We have read LiveReel Media Corporation’s statements
included under Item 16F of its Form 20-F dated November 21, 2016,
and we agree with such statements.





Yours
very truly,





SCHWARTZ LEVITSKY
FELDMAN LLP


Chartered
Accountants


Licensed Public
Accountants





/s/SCHWARTZ
LEVITSKY FELDMAN LLP





Per:
Warren Goldberg, CPA, CA


Partner





WG/cc





2300 Yonge Street,
Suite 1500, Box 2434Toronto, Ontario
M4P 1E4Tel: 416 785
5353Fax: 416 785
5663
| 1)   | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of      the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2)   | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                      | Pacific State      Bancorp |                                 |
|---------------------------|----------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|                      |                       |                                 |   |
| Date:      March 31, 2009 | By:                        | /s/ Justin      Garner          |   |
|                      |                       | Justin      Garner    |   |
|                      |                       | Chief Financial      Officer    |   |
|                      |                       |                                 |   |
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

City of Stephenville, Self

- Insured

, * From the 266 th District Court

of Erath County,

Trial Court No. CV34200

.

Vs. No. 11

- 2 2

- 00 273

- C V * Ma rch 7 , 20 2 4

Anna Belew, Jodi Belew, * Opinion by Trotter , J.

M inor CB, and M inor RB, (P anel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter , J. , and Williams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is

error in the judgment below

. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion,

we reverse the judgment of the trial court and render judgment in favor of the City

of Stephenville, Self

- Insured . The costs incurred by reason of this appeal are taxed

against Anna Belew, Jodi Belew, M inor CB, and M inor RB

.
# C_2020077EN.01004801.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/48

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 January 2020 — Julius Sämann v EUIPO — Maharishi Vedic University (Representation of a tree)

(Case T-559/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for an EU figurative mark representing a tree - Earlier EU and international figurative marks representing an ‘arbre magique’ (magic tree) - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - No similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - No damage to reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2020/C 77/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Julius Sämann Ltd (Thayngen, Switzerland) (represented by: D. Parrish, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: K. Kompari, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Maharishi Vedic University Ltd (Mgarr, Malta) (represented by: L. Prehn, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 May 2019 (Case R 1743/2018-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Julius Sämann and Maharishi Vedic University.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Julius Sämann Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Julius Sämann Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.

---
# C_2020045EN.01002701.xml

| 10.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/27

---

Appeal brought on 28 November 2019 by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 20 September 2019 in Case T-65/18, Venezuela v Council

(Case C-872/19 P)

(2020/C 45/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (represented by: L. Giuliano and F. Di Gianni, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it dismissed the action as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it dismissed the action as inadmissible;

| — | declare the action brought by the appellant admissible and refer the case back to the General Court to rule on the merits of the case; and |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the action brought by the appellant admissible and refer the case back to the General Court to rule on the merits of the case; and

| — | order the Council to pay the costs of these proceedings and of the proceedings before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs of these proceedings and of the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the appeal, the appellant relies on a sole ground of appeal divided into three limbs.

The General Court wrongly interpreted the criterion of direct concern provided for in the fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU in light of Almaz-Antey case law:

| 1. | The General Court applied the wrong test to assess whether the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is directly concerned by the contested provisions (1). |
| --- | --- |

1.

The General Court applied the wrong test to assess whether the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is directly concerned by the contested provisions (1).

| 2. | The General Court erred in law since it overlooked some essential circumstances of the present case when applying the direct concern criterion as established in Almaz-Antey. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The General Court erred in law since it overlooked some essential circumstances of the present case when applying the direct concern criterion as established in Almaz-Antey.

| 3. | The General Court neglected to consider the factual effects of the contested provisions on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The General Court neglected to consider the factual effects of the contested provisions on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

---

(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2074 of 13 November 2017 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela (OJ 2017, L 295, p. 60).

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF YOUNG & RUBICAM AND SUBSIDIARY  COMPANIES
FOUND IN THE  COMPANY'S  FORM 10-Q AS OF AND FOR THE SIX  MONTHS  ENDED JUNE 30,
1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                            1
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1 
<CASH>                                          76,760,000 
<SECURITIES>                                             0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                  818,152,000 
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (14,839,000)
<INVENTORY>                                              0 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,028,018,000 
<PP&E>                                         349,037,000 
<DEPRECIATION>                                (229,103,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,515,638,000 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,200,892,000 
<BONDS>                                                  0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0 
<PREFERRED>                                              0 
<COMMON>                                           704,000 
<OTHER-SE>                                      88,797,000 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,515,638,000 
<SALES>                                                  0 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               720,301,000 
<CGS>                                                    0 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  885,440,000 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (2,200,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,172,000 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (173,111,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (38,205,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (133,201,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  4,433,000 
<CHANGES>                                                0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  (137,634,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (2.50)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (2.50)
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.2

I, Daniel L. Hefner, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of American Commerce Solutions, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual
report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual
report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the Evaluation Date); and

c) presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrants other certifying officers
and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and

6. The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



|                     |  |                                               |  |             
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------- |  | ------------
|/s/ Daniel L. Hefner |  | Chief Executive Officer, President & Director |  | June 9, 2006
# C_2019182EN.01002601.xml

| 27.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/26

---

Appeal brought on 25 March 2019 by Comprojecto-Projetos e Construções, Lda and Others against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 14 February 2019 in Case T-768/17 by Comprojecto Pr jetos e Construções, Lda and Others v European Central Bank (ECB)

(Case C-251/19 P)

(2019/C 182/31)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Appellants: Comprojecto-Projetos e Construções, Lda, Paulo Eduardo Matos Gomes de Azevedo, Julião Maria Gomes de Azevedo, Isabel Maria Gomes de Azevedo (represented by: M. Ribeiro, advogado)

Other party to the proceedings: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The appellants submit that the Court of Justice should:

| — | Declare the appeal admissible, and refer the case back to the General Court for it to give judgment on the substance; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare the appeal admissible, and refer the case back to the General Court for it to give judgment on the substance;

| — | Pursuant to Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, annul the decision and refer the case back to the General Court, requiring that costs be duly assessed, in accordance with Article 138 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

Pursuant to Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, annul the decision and refer the case back to the General Court, requiring that costs be duly assessed, in accordance with Article 138 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court.

---
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I,Hong Liang Lu, certify that:

1.     I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of UTStarcom, Inc.;

2.     Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a.      Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b.      [Paragraphomitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238; 34-47986];

c.      Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

d.      Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.      Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

Date: June 3, 2005
| /s/ HONG  LIANG LU                      |     |
|-----------------------------------------|----------|
| Hong Liang Lu                           |     |
| *President and Chief Executive Officer* | * * |

 

  

----
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANYING PERIODIC REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Sherice P. Bench, Chief Financial Officer of American Achievement
Corporation (the Company), hereby certify that: (1) The Annual Report of
the Company on Form 10-K/A for the year ended August 28,
2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report. Date:
August 5, 2005 /s/ SHERICE P. BENCHName: Sherice P. BenchTitle: Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Minera Andes Inc. (the
Corporation), on Form 10-QSB for the nine month period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Allen V. Ambrose, President of the Corporation, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.
| | -- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                        |  | MINERA ANDES INC.
|----------------------- |  | -----------------
|                        |  |                  
|Date: November 14, 2003 |  | By:              
|                        |  |                  
|                        |  |